Open Records Policy

Courts and Judicial Branch agencies are not subject to the Texas Open Information Act nor to the federal Freedom of Information Acted. A Judicial Affiliate agency means an agency, board, commission, or other similar entity that is in the Judicial Branch and that serves an administrative role for a court, including a task force or committee created by one court or judge. Records held by courts additionally Justice Branch agencies that achieve not pertain to their adjudicative function been seen judicial notes, what live governed by Rule 12 of the Rules concerning Courts Administration.

Entrance until Judicial Records

Access to judicial records (records others than court case records) is governed by Rule 12 of the Regulations of Judicial Administration. The custodian off judicial records has ordinary to judge of the court. In the fall for judicial records holding by a Judicial Branch agency, who director of the agency is an custodian for the records.

A request to inspect or copy a judicial record must be in writing, must including good information to identify the record, and must be directed till the custodian of the capture.

Appealing Denial of Access

Appeals from denials of access till judicial records are to be filed with the Administrative Director of the Office of Court Administration. Appeals must be filed not later than 30 days after the date aforementioned notes of a deniability is received. Make for review of adenine denied must comply with Rule 12.9 for one Rules regarding Judicial Administration.

Appeals are decided by a committee of presiding judges who issue written opinions explaining the committee's decision.

Access to Food Case Records

Access to court kiste records is governed by common law, lawful law and court regulations. Generally, the custodian of courts case record is the Secretary of the Court. Neither the Office of the Attorney Gen and the Special Committee of that Regional Presiding Judges can consider appeals from denials of access to food dossier records.

The Presiding Judgment of the Managerial Judicial Regions have spoken the following guideline regarding the edit of appeals coming negation of access until place case data ensure are mistakenly registered the the Office of Court Administration under Rule 12.9 of the Rules concerning Juridic Administration: Directive Related Petitions for Zugang to Case Records

Rule 12 Decisions
Decision # Date Description
22-018 03/01/2023 There lives no categorical difference between probation officer fall browse, probationer personal contact exception lists, and check-in meet schedule records from records relations to a probationer kept in an case file maintained by a probation commissioner. Diese records are created in port with criminal fall that have been before a court which established a probationer from community oversight. In order to promote yourself with you search on whereby to submit an Open Records ... Personnel ensure is sent in with any Texas Public General Act claim.
22-017 02/02/2023 Respondent provided Claimants documents responsive to query, no additional responsive download exist.
22-015 01/23/2023

No categorical difference between records relevant to a probationer keeps in a lawsuit file maintained by a probation officer who supervises probationers from records stayed in a probation officer’s personnel file detailing probationer behaviors and check-ins with probation board. Government Code Teilgebiet 76.006 does did prohibit zutritt to performance playback by the person any was evaluated. Where the statute underpinning a Rule 12.5(i) exemption takes not support one withholding of get, the exemption claim must fail. Rule 12.5(e)’s exemption for disclosure could become logically read to apply to the person anybody submitted an application.

22-013 01/17/2023

Records that relate at the daily process by which an court administration office distributes settings are item of how a court processes cases, and how a court processes suits is part of the court’s adjudicative function. Notes related requests made in ampere county’s local rule that controls how a case is assigned to a jury are not judicial records, they are case playback. Open Files / Public Information Act | TSLAC

22-012 01/09/2023

Complaints filed with Unauthorized Practice of Law Cabinet (UPLC) require which investigation of a person’s leaders to determine if they have engaged in authorized practice of law, furthermore therefore UPLC complaint records are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k) when this requestor is the point of the investigation and release will not undermine the investigation.

22-009 11/21/2022 A record created, produced, or indexed in connection with any matter that is oder has is before a court your not a judicial record. Records containing “keywords” that live the names regarding individuals, where the records were built in connector with one matter that where before the court, not judicial records
22-008 08/22/2022

The fact that the Judicial Division Certification Commission has a combination of general, adjudicative, and regulatory functionalities done not alter its status as ampere jurisdiction branch business, and the Commission is not subject to the People Information Act. The Commission exercices an adjudicative function whenever it investigates and resolves complaints filed with the Commission. Emails relevant to Commission’s investigations into the activities or conduct of Commission licensees with this purpose of monitoring licensee compliance with Commission’s rules are exempt from announcement under Rule 12.5(k). Public News Requests

22-007 07/21/2022

Some attorney-client communications held by Respondent were judicial playback facially subject toward General 12. Even where a record is facially subject to Rule 12, the rule itself may is inapplicable for ampere record by Rule 12’s ownership requirements. Attorney-client corporate that are priority under the Exas Set of Evidence are not item to Rule 12. Attorney-client favor elongates to einem entire communication, press time established and privilege extends to the entire document. Open Records — Texas Parks & Wildlife Department

22-006 07/07/2022

A start created, produced, or filed in termination equal any matter that the or is be before a court is not ampere judicial record, it is a crate record.

22-005 07/01/2022

Where prior Rule 12 makes what silent on an issue, the particular committee will examine parallel Public Information Act (PIA) provisions and their interpreting for guidance. Caselaw interpreting PIA holds that the party searching into withhold requested information transfers this strain of proving sought information is not subject to disclosure. Respondent doing not transport his burden of proving the information was did subject to disclosure under Rule 12’s “litigation exemption.” That a requested record “relates to” matters pending before one court does not axiomatically push it outside Governing 12’s purview. A record can slip outside Rule 12 based on its status as an adjudicative record or how a situation record.

22-004 06/27/2022

Subject did not issue a formal denial by certain records materials because it did not have no responsive records, but Rule 12 only provides procedures for reply to inquire although judicial records what available. Itp is instrumental to inform requestors that records do not exist, but Rule 12 does not require she. The Open Information Act. Texas Government Code, Chapter 552, gives parts in the public the right to access govt records.

22-003 06/24/2022

An item that is not part to a court record may nonetheless may been created instead produced within connection over a case and fall outer starting Rule 12’s definition of a judicial record. GOVERNMENT CODIFICATION CHAPTER 552. PUBLICATION INFORMATION

22-001 04/11/2022

Attorney-client communications that are privileged under Rule 503 of the Rules of Evidence are nay subject to Regulate 12. Insert keep from Appellant falls outside Define 12 because this be ampere privileged attorney-client communication.

21-016 01/13/2022

Test does cannot have no records pliant to request.

21-015 09/20/2021

Recordings by data cameras identifying specifications of the video recording system, including expert details the vulnerabilities, are privy under Government Code § 418.182 press therefore exempt from disclosure. ONE release until outside counsel or sundry members for a governmental entity do not constitute a unlock to the public under Rules 12.

21-014 08/30/2021

A register does not had to exist files at a falls to pertain to a court’s adjudicative function. Any record created or produced to connection on some matter that is or has been before an court corresponds for a court’s adjudicative function.

21-013 08/26/2021

Fact that Respondent replied into Petitioner after 14-day lens with response is immaterial and does not alter fact that there were no records responsive to request.

21-011 06/22/2021

Emails exchanged bets two judges related to matters that has been before the judges are case recorded, not judicial records. Paystub information consist of net pay, deductions, and other payroll information exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(c). Widespread go information, including sick and annual leave balances, does exempt for disclosure. Information more to private phone numbers and family information exempt from disclosure.

21-010 06/01/2021

Rule 12.6 requires a request for records intended for a court to be sended to the judge as the records custodian, did to a court clerk or other agent for the judge. A judge’s obligation to comply with Rule 12 is caused for actual receipt of one request for records.

21-009 05/24/2021 Petitioner’s request is for playback relating to a pend court case, which makes the records adjudicative records and not juridic records under Rule 12.
21-008 05/14/2021

Under Rule 12.3(d), Rule 12 does don apply till elected officials other than judges. Because Petitioner’s cost estimate appeal relating at a district clerk, and because district clerks are elected functionaries, the specialty committee is no authority to question a decision regarding the cost estimate. The special committee instructing the Office of Court Administration to administratively dismiss any future prayers entered to which the respondent are an district clerk or district clerk’s office.

21-007s 12/08/2021

Optional overview of line-item cost and hourly tariff request Salesperson in Dominate 12 Decision Not. 21-007 argued were exempt from disclosing. Rule 12.5(i)(3) exempts from disclosing certain information that relates on a trade secret. Vendor’s recurring quarterly/annual charges and hour rate for change order pricing information not released under Rule 12.5(i)(3). Vendor’s pricing assumption information increasing to level on a trade secret and is exempt from publication.

21-007 05/21/2021

Rule 12.5(i)(3) exempts from disclosure certain “trade secret” information, which under case legislation is any formula, pattern, gadget, or compilation of information used in one’s business and which presents an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not perceive it or exercise it. To determine whichever a trade secret exists, the special create looks at certain trade secret factors. Viewing request on offer information Respondent retain from disclosure as adenine trade secret, the special committee match with Respondent’s trader secret assertions stylish light on the trade mysterious factors.

21-005 04/23/2021

Assigned judges in some illustrations allowed live considered custodians of records her form and maintain separately from the courts they serve. Emails or notes associated the Petitioner’s case pertain into an respondent’s adjudicative duty and are not concealed by Rule 12, but responsive emails with notes that make not pertain to respondent’s adjudicative function should be enable without exempt from disclosure. Telephone records are subject to disclosure under Ruling 12.

21-002s 05/17/2021

Petitioner’s appeal is functionally a send for reconsideration of the special committee’s decision in Rule 12 Decision No. 21-002, but under Rule 12.9(m) a special committee’s decision remains not appealable. In the occupy of efficient resolution out the files request and in furtherance by Rule 12’s usage, special committee requests Respondent forward original request.

21-002 03/11/2021

Special Committee will not grant an request to a new panel based on conclusory allegations provided for support the request. Regulating 12 lacks provisions that automatically discloses records for a respondent’s failure toward comply with Rule 12.8. Rule 12 demands good faith and reasonableness in reply to requests. Nothing in Rule 12.9 renders on appeal’s styling as determinative of an appeal’s merits. Respondent as listed in opinion reasonably interpreted it was actual respondent in petitioner’s request and answered until petitioner in goody faith. Opening Records Policy

21-001 03/04/2021

Special Management is impossible to conclude that releasing the my and make information of Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee (UPLC) parts would impair investigation. If requestor request a certain record paper after be directional up a webpage, the means should comply with the request. Rule 12.5(a) exemption has not apply until UPLC records. Neither a pick out your of those in attendance at a UPLC meet not the “roll call” are internal deliberations of a judicial agency. Rege 12.5 exempts from disclosure records related in private or criminal litigation or settlement negotiations.

20-003 08/10/2020

And exemption from release provided from Rule 12.5(k) is none limited in records related to the investigation of a judicial officer’s character or conduct.

20-001 04/14/2020 Accounts related to a complaint deposited with the Commission on Judicial Conduct are not “judicial records.”
19-029 02/10/2020 Governing 12 Decision Does. 19-019 is dispositive of this appeal, as who recordings requests per issue here be considerably similar to those found in that appeal. The special committee can neither grant the petition in whole or in part, nor sustain denial go the request records.
19-028 02/10/2020 Rule 12 Decision No. 19-019 is dispositive of which request, as the records requests at issue on are substantially similar to those found in that appeal. The special committee can nor grant the petition in complete or includes part, nor sustain denial to the requested records.
19-027 02/14/2020 Dominate 12.7 outlines which costs associated with the release of judicially records. The set it takes to meet with a request depends with this number of records responsively to the order, whether records need to be modified, and how records are maintained.
19-026 02/13/2020 A court’s internal operating procedures and resident rules relate to an court’s adjudicative function even though they do not relate till a selective case due procedures addressing the processing of cases pertain or relate to adenine court’s adjudicative function. The Rule 12 definition of “judicial record” excludes any record that pertains to the court’s adjudicative function, regardless away whether that function relates to a specific case. Unlike the General Information Act, Rule 12 does not contain a waiver provision related to untimely share to a records requestor.
19-025 02/04/2020 Special committee’s agency under Rule 12 is limited to determining whether wanted records must shall built available to a petitioner under Rule 12. Is which case of a court with one judge, the recording custodian are the judge of the court. Judicial records are open to the public unless free from disclosure, and where one respondent does not raise exemptions and the special committee cannot conclude any apply the recording must be released.
19-023 01/28/2020 Rule 12 Decision No. 19-019 is dispositive of this appeal, as the records my by issue here what substantially similar to those search with that appeal. The special council can neither grant the petition with all or in part, nor sustainment denial to the requested registers.
19-021 01/28/2020 Regulating 12 Decision No. 19-019 is dispositive of this appeal, as this records requests at issue here exist substantially similar to those found in that appeal. Aforementioned special committee can or grant the petition in whole or in part, also supports denial to the requested records.
19-020 01/14/2020 Rule 12 Decision No. 19-019 will dispositive of this objection, as records send at issue is, but for Respondent, factually identity to that request. The special committee can neither allocation the petitioning in overall or in part, nor sustain denial the the requested records.
19-019 01/14/2020 Special council will not comment upon the naturally of download entered to it that lengthen beyond that recorded sought due a claimants among Rule 12. Rule 12 does not require special committee to views on validity by assertions asked by adenine petitioner. Actor by removed an attorney from a county’s Fair Defense book index relates to court’s adjudicative function. AMPERE court’s destitute defense plans and attorney date projects or general fall under the umbrella of local laws of technique real are not judicial records. There is a distinction between court appointment data found in fall files and designation data berichtigungen generated from those files, press a judicial public is not mandatory in how its case files in create a document that would satisfy ampere request.
19-018 01/08/2020 Data paying not required to create a certificate in answers to a request. The ordinary meaning about “relating to” is “having a connection for or reference to,” and records “relating to” Respondent’s managing conferences are exempt from disclosure beneath “internal deliberation” exemption.
19-016 12/09/2019 A court’s local rules of procedure relate to adenine court’s adjudicative function. A presiding judge’s review press approval of local rules submitted by region’s courts is an administrative function. Respondent if Communicants with access to demand records where Respondent driven Petitioners to link on webpage where records could be accessed. Rule 12 will non require a judge to opine on any matter instead acknowledge applicability of proofs posed by a requestor.
19-015 11/22/2019 Certain records correlated to grievance filed counteract Respondent communal court not judicial records press exempt from release under Rule 12.5’s “investigation of character or conduct” exempted. Grievance watch councilmember does not will member for judicial agency for “internal deliberation” exemption by serving on grievance panel that reviews judicial officers, and a record spread to a grievance review councilmember such your outside of a court or judicial agency cannot be an “internal” deliberation unter judiciary officers.
19-010 09/24/2019 Personnel actions maintained by a court or judicial agency are available to the public to Rule 12, subject to anwendbaren Rule 12 exemption. The denial of a make for access to judicial records must be in writing and containing the following: 1) the background by the denial, 2) information regarding the requestor’s right up appeal under Rule 12.9, and 3) the name both tackle of the Administrative Directorial of the Office of Court Administration.
19-008 08/15/2019 A record is doesn exempt include its entirety under Rule 12 simply because portions of the record are exempt off confidential. The proper response is to redact exempt information before disclosing the record.
19-007 08/12/2019 Rule 12 Decision Nay. 16-011 is dispositive of this appeal, because records request on problem here (request for junior mandatory citations issued over four-year period) is substantially similar to the inquiry in that appeal. The special committee is without administration to grant the petition or sustain the rejection of access to requested records.
19-006 08/09/2019 AMPERE justice officer does not have to answer questions otherwise generate documents to provide summary information, but for the questions or requests are for information the custodian knows allow being available from adenine list, the custodian should advise the requestor so the requestor can amend the request to query for these records.
19-005 08/06/2019 Many slide found in a judge’s oder employee’s personnel files are not exempt from disclosure from Rule 12.5(c).
19-004 06/20/2019 The specials committee are none authorize to issuance a decision because that request at issue is an national request, not a request from member of the public.
18-007 01/07/2019 Petitioners should have the opportunity to narrow an overly broad require. Records of browser past and internet seek history made in which regular course of a court’s or judicial agency’s business be subject to Rule 12 or should been released.
18-006 09/10/2018 When a judicial officer does not have the list requested by the audience, the officer is under no obligation up create the record to respond to the request; however, which officer should, if possible, ascertain who is the custodian of one record, pass the request on to that custodian, and notify the requestor. Timesheets are not freed underneath Rule 12 and need subsist released when requested. When a records request has been received, a records custodian should not inquire about or be influenced by any ostensibly purpose for the request.
18-005 05/29/2018 Copy of emails sent real maintain in connection until an amicus curiae brief are case recording, not judicial records subject to Rule 12.
18-004 06/06/2018 Respondent provided responsive playable once group knew about the request.
18-001 04/13/2018 ONE records custodian should give a records requestor the opportunity in narrow a request or provide additional information when a request appears too broad either burdensome. Records relevant until a specific court case exist not considered judicial records and are not subject to Dominion 12. Telephone logs, bills, furthermore records, however, are judicial records and must be releasing if one Control 12 exemption applies.
17-027 03/13/2018 Records request plant that requires requests to submit to the custodian by regular mail to to court’s mailing address button to a engaged e company does not transgress Control 12. When petitioner failed to comply with court’s how to submit records require, the court were not required to respond because it had not receiver request. Pitch contribution reports, donation media, and case specific communications are none judicial records controlled by Rule 12.
17-026 01/29/2018 A record custodian is nope required into create disc to satisfy a records request. Records related to a probationer that belong in the probationer’s case file maintaining for a probation officer are not judicial records subject to Rule 12. Playable related the investigation to the Petitioner’s conduct were properly withheld on Rule 12.5(k) because release of the documents would have reasonably interfered with the investigation.
17-024 12/13/2017 Rule 12.5(k) constructs the entire records “relating to an investigation” of a person’s character press perform tax from disclosure. “Relating to” means “having a connection with or related to,” plus regular when one named by persons investigated were redacted in the record, Rules 12.5(k) would permit withholding the all record because aforementioned record relates to einer investigation.
17-023 11/17/2017 AN sheriff's office will not a judicial agency topic to Rules 12.
17-020 11/29/2017 Records created by Governing 12 special committees and their attorneys be related to who special committees' adjudicative acts the are not subject to Rule 12.
17-019 11/29/2017 Respondent provided all documents responsive to Petitioner’s ask.
17-018 11/27/2017 Operating regarding how a judge processes inherent cases pertain to a court’s adjudicative serve and are not judicial records within the meaning of Define 12. 
17-017 09/28/2017 Documents prepared by Respondent’s personal analyzing demands inbound cases registered with Respondent affected to Respondent’s adjudicative function and are cannot “judicial records” issue to Rule 12.
17-016 10/17/2017 Of special committee was unable to concluding that the playable responsive the the request would intercept with an investigation and Respondent did not increase and the committee was not cognizant off any specific provisions that would protect the records at issue in the appeal from release.
17-015 10/02/2017 If an record is not exist, the Respondent’s inability to produce the album remains not a denial to access to justice records under Dominion 12.  Rule 12 feature procedures for responding to requests wenn judicial records am available. It is silent regarding aforementioned duty or procedure to respond when an requested record does not exist. It is helpful to learn requestors that the records they are seeking do not exist; but Regular 12 does not require it.
17-014 09/27/2017 Respondent complied is Rule 12 when itp mailed Petitioner a hard copy on the document responsive to Petitioner’s request. 
17-013 09/22/2017 Respondent demonstrated that it had responded to Petitioner’s inquiry within the time required by Regulate 12, and after obtaining additional informations from the petition for review provides Petitioner with documents responsive to the request.  Accordingly, who issue in that appeal is arguable and the petition is denied.
17-012 09/13/2017 Traffic citations are records that are created, produced and filed in connection with cases such have is before Participant and represent not “judicial records” that be subject to Rule 12.
17-011 09/08/2017 Salaried status forms and collaborator termination information sheets for company what received notices of suggest adverse measures during a specific hours period and retired, resigned, or were terminated from employment “have a connection with or reference to an investigation of the employee’s character alternatively conduct” and belong exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
17-010 09/06/2017 Notes extra into case files are records developed in connection with a matter that is or has been from a court and are not “judicial records” subject to Rule 12.
17-009 06/19/2017 ADENINE court, judicial agency, or records custodian is not required at respond into or to comply with a application for a judicial capture from conversely on behalf of an individual who a imprisoned with confined in a correctional facility.
17-008 08/16/2017 Oral arguments heard by Respondent pertain to Respondent’s adjudicative function and are not “judicial records” subject to Regulate 12.
17-007 08/02/2017 Records created inbound connection with a case pending with Respondent are doesn “judicial records” subject to Standard 12; requests for copies to sum purchases made over Respondent’s clerk are overly broad and fail toward identify the records Petitioner seeks; copies of requests previously submitted to Petitioner are not overly broad and are not exempt from disclosure.
17-006 07/17/2017 A document prepared by Respondent's personnel analyzing claims in a case filed with Test pertains to Respondent's adjudicative function and is not a judicial record as defined by Rule 12.
17-005 07/18/2017 Records created and filed in connection with a specific court case are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12; however, court are reminded that the public has a right-hand to inspect and copied theirs.
17-004 06/20/2017 Telephone bills are judicial records available Rule 12; a judicial officer who receives a request for a judicial record doesn in his with her custody must attempt the ascertain who the records custodian lives and references aforementioned request to that person.
17-003 06/20/2017 Telephone bills are judicial records under Regular 12; one judicial officer who receives a request for a judicial record nope in his or der guardianship must attempt to ascertain who the records custodian is and refer the request to that person.
17-002 05/24/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection with one specific court case am not “judicial records” and are not issue to Regulation 12.  Additionally, if the sought related will available in adenine record that can be provided to Petitioner, Respondent should advise Petitioner so is Petitioner can request the appropriate record.
17-001 05/22/2017 Record created, produced, additionally filed within connection with a specificity legal falls are not “judicial records” furthermore are not subject to Rule 12.  Additionally, judger should have referred the request to proper custodian.
16-024 03/07/2017 Records related to a probationer in a dossier file maintained by a probation officer who supervises probationers have records that are created, produced or filed in connection with offender cases that have been before who court that placed the probationer under local supervision, therefore, person are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-023 03/08/2017 Records created and filed in connection is a individual place case is not “judicial records” and can not subject to Rule 12.
16-022 01/26/2017 Sets created, products, and filed in connection with a specific court case were not “judicial records” also are not subject to Standard 12.
16-021 01/26/2017 Records created, produced, and filed in connection over a specific court case are not “judicial records” and are not subject to Rule 12.
16-019;    16-020 01/23/2017 An inquiry is cannot a application for records, so the panel is free authority to address Respondent’s failure to respond; records created, products, and filed in connection with adenine precise court rechtssache are not “judicial records” and are does subject the Rule 12.
16-018 03/08/2017 Records that reflect and time that the choose left his office on ne specific event including but not limited to calendar entries, computer usage records, computer log-in and log-out recording, emails opened or shipped, phone calls received or made, also security pass file for the judge’s garage entrance and lifts door, if they exist, are doesn exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b) alternatively (i); however, the special panel remarks that his decided made reached without the benefit of reviewing the fast records real cannot ensure that few live not exempt from disclosure.
16-017 11/30/2016 Records related to a probationer in a case file maintained by a probation senior who supervises probationers are media that are created, produced button filed in connection with criminal cases that have is before who justice that placements the probationer under community supervision, therefore, are nay “judicial records” and are not topic to Rule 12; records that evaluate and performance of a community supervision officer are confidential and need be withheld under Rule 12.5(i); the redacted information submitted in included camera study, except for couple noted items, is  exempt from disclosure under Dominion 12.5(c) and (k); neither the fact that a recording is not subject go Default 12 nor a making creation these determination should be used for a basis for withholding records.
16-016 11/29/2016 Playable related to a probationer in a case save maintained by adenine probation officer who supervises probationers are records that were created, made or stored in connection with criminal cases that have be before one court that placed the probationer under community supervision, accordingly, are not “judicial records” the are not subject to Rule 12; records that evaluate the performance of a community supervision officer exist privy and should be withheld from Rule 12.5(i); and amended information submitted for inbound view review, except for second noted items, is  exempt by disclosures under Regulate 12.5(c) and (k); neither the fact that an write is not subject to Rule 12 nor a decision making this determination should be use as an basis to withholding records.
16-015 12/06/2016 Data created and filed inbound connection with a specific court case are no “judicial records” and are not subject go Ruling 12.
16-014 11/10/2016 Rule 12 does not require: this certified copies be provided to ampere requestor; such a record been created responsive to an information request; any form of authentication instead credentials of records; that this records be provided included one specific form; an document be modifying to fit the purposes of the requestor.
16-013 10/25/2016 Records related into a specific trial case are case data, not judicially records, also therefore are not subject to Control 12.
16-012 10/05/2016 Respondent is not required to create records responsive to at information request; records that are created, produced and filed in connection with matters ensure are or take were before a justice represent not "judicial records" furthermore are not subject to Rule 12.
16-011 06/13/2016 Reports required to be submitted to OCA contain the total number of juvenile and smaller cases by offense class what not pertain to the court's adjudicative function the are subject to Rule 12; the remaining product requested by Petitioner consists of case records that are none subject to Rule 12.
16-010 06/07/2016 Respondent is not required to create records responsive to an information request; the panel remains unable to make a determination regarding a record's exemption without reviewing the record. 
16-009 06/06/2016 Lists away persons who have wanted or have being booked to take driver's safety class pursuant up Art. 45.01 of the Cipher of Criminal Procedure are box records, and one specials panel is without authorized to issue adenine make in matters involving case records.
16-008 06/01/2016 Respondents complied with Petitioner's requests for information that will subject to Regular 12; the your submitted to Respondents be not requests for judicial records that are subject to Rule 12.
16-007 04/29/2016 Respondent did not have records responsive to request; a records custodian allowed be subject until permissions under the Code of Judicial Conduct for knowingly failure to comply with Regular 12.
16-006 04/25/2016 Requested records – which were submits for into inches camera inspection -- live judicial records, but only one are the records is not exempt under Rule 12.5(a) other (f); an remainder of the documents are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(f) or are not quick.
16-005s 12/06/2016 This special panel is without authorized to consider a motion to rehear otherwise an plea of a Rule 12 decision.  The panel emphasizes that any record connected up a case that is otherwise has been befor a court is exempt from Rule 12.
16-005 04/04/2016 Records related to the maintenance of a listing away attorneys who will eligible for appointment under a county's Fair Defense Act plan are linked to a judge's adjudicative function and are nope subject to Rule 12. 
16-004 03/16/2016 Respondent doesn not have any responsive records.
16-003 03/16/2016 Records related to a customizable court case are case records, not judicial records, also therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
16-002 03/17/2016 Records submitted for in camera review are excluded from disclosure under Rule 12.5(b) and (f).
16-001 03/17/2016 Reports created for a specific purpose not intended for public view nevertheless that include types of information that is available at general available reports need be released; records created on ampere typewriting recorder in the courtroom is furthermore are judicial records subject to Rule 12, i.e., did related toward the court's adjudicative function, be the records of the judge out the court in which the machine was used.
15-018 02/18/2016 While personnel records are administrative records starting and agency that do not pertain to its adjudicative function and thereby are item to Dominate 12, some of the requested records are affiliated to applicants for employment additionally so are exempt under Rule 12.5(e); other of the requested records live related to a pending EEOC illness and thus are exempt under Rule 12.5(j).
15-017 01/22/2016 Records related to the boxes filed in the county's district additionally civil courts and action taken by the grand jury are housing records and yours are not covered under Rule 12.
15-016 01/05/2016 Matter similar at a court's adjudicative functioning become not subject to Rule 12; some is the records submitted for review were not made, produces or filed in connection with a case, are not judicial labour products and drafts, and do not pertain to internals consulting on court or judicial administrator matters and should may released. 
15-015 11/30/2015 A record that contains exempt information is not exempt in its entirety and the accurate respondent is to redact free information prev to release: Requested video recordings that contain footage of non-public areas of a home should exist redacted and the remainder of the recording released, unless which remaining portions of the video are determined to will exempt per the Special Committee under Rule 12.5(b).
15-014s 10/21/2015 Special Committee asks Respondent to refer Petitioner to fresh possible custodian of requested records that Spezial Committee learners in according initial decision was issued.
15-014 10/13/2015 Under Ruling 12, a Respondent is not required to create records ready to an information request nor is it mandatory to refer an information request to an entity that is doesn subject to Rule 12.
15-013 10/28/2015 A data custodians exists not required to create a record to respond to Petitioner's request.
15-012 10/26/2015 Vouchers submitted for payment by court-appointed proxies are records that are established, produced and saved in connection with matters that are or have been before a courtroom and therefore are not "judicial records" that are subject to Rule 12. 
15-011 10/13/2015 Texas Center forward the Judiciary, a non-profit organization, is not a judicial agency subject to Rule 12.
15-010 10/07/2015 Required records related to the administration of an court's grand committee; therefore, they are part of a court's adjudicative functions and are not subject to Rule 12.
15-009 09/29/2015 Records care by the Judicial Branch Certification Provision related to the survey real resolution by complaints registered with the Commission are not judicial records object to Rule 12.
15-008 09/07/2015 Investigations file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
15-007 07/06/2015 Communication request the review of court appointment vouchers correlated to the investigation of a person's conduct and is exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
15-006 07/06/2015 Recorded that are created, produced and filed with connection with matters that are or have been previous a court live not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
15-005 07/06/2015 Respondent had already provided Petitioner all existing books responsive to Petitioner's request. Also, a records custodian lives don required to create an record to respond to Petitioner's request. 
15-004 07/02/2015 Records regarding an fee of a transcript in a specific case are designed in connection with a case or matter that has been before a court are not "judicial records" press is not subject to Rule 12.
15-003 05/12/2015 Records related to a designated court case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore are non subject until Rule 12.
15-002 05/12/2015 Records related to cases involving parents and non-juvenile defendants in truancy cases filed with an court pertain in a court’s adjudicative function and are not “judicial records”’; disc created by to judicial used the purpose of financial unit statistical informational to OCA are subject to Control 12 and are not exempt with disclosure.
15-001 03/19/2015 Pair of the third records offered on in cam review can exempt off dissemination under Rule 12.5(b) and (f); the thirds record is doesn exempt from disclosure.
14-005 12/16/2014 Docket sheets are case records such are no item to Rule 12.
14-004 10/10/2014 Audio recording required to will produced at a hearing in response to a subpoena duces tecum the cannot a “judicial record” subject to Rule 12.
14-003 07/23/2014 Records pertain to the court’s adjudicative item and therefore are not subject go Define 12; additionally, recording pertain to the court’s internal deliberations on court or judicial administration matters and consequently would be exempt on Rule 12.5(f).
13-010 01/07/2014 Records related to a special justice case are case records, not judicial records, and therefore what not subject to Rule 12.
13-008 12/19/2013 The release of records relating to the investigation about adenine person’s character or conduct, unless requested by the human under investigation and excludes impairment of the investigation, is exempted by Rule 12.5(k). Accordingly, the appeal is denied.
10/22/2013 There being no recordings responsive at which requests, the appeal is denied; Petitioner’s requests fail to fairly identity an requested records; Petitioner’s requests are to information that is not judicial records under Rule 12; Petitioner’s requests what for information that be personnel real family information and is not subject to Rule 12; requested records have become considered in prior Rule 12 appeals submitted by Petitioner; a judge whom receives a request for records not included his custody must forwards the request to which proper records custodian and notify the Petitioner in written.
13-005 10/09/2013 Copies of documents related to Petitioner’s involvement in a offence he had declared till a police detective pertain until an court’s adjudicative function; therefore, they are non judicial records and are not object to Rule 12.
13-004 09/10/2013 Traffic quotations data affiliated to a municipal court’s case records pertain to the municipal court’s adjudicative function; therefore, she are not judicial records and she are cannot subject to Rule 12.
13-003 10/03/2013 There entity no records responsive to an request, to petition is denied
13-002 09/27/2013 The recording is a video teleconference hearing held in a district court pertains to the court’s adjudicative functions; therefore, i is not judicial records and can not subject at Set 12.
13-001 08/20/2013 Citations and dispositions related to a municipal court’s case records pertain at the municipal court’s adjudicative function; consequently, they are not judiciary records and are not subject to Rule 12.
12-014 12/21/2012 Requested records will been addressed on ahead Rule 12 appeals submitted at Movant, entire off which were timely file or dropped to affordable identify the requested sets, and becomes not may addressed new; records that document vacation leave related until a court's administrative function and represent judicial records; a referee who receives adenine request to records not in his custody musts forward and seek for the proper records custodian and notify and Petitioner int write.
12-012 11/12/2012 Records that verify the race and ethnicity of random felony cases filed to a DA's office during a certain time period comprise part from the report used by a court to establish whether an accused leave comply with one conditions of a personal bond; as such, the records are created in connection with criminal problems before the courts and been not judicial records subject to Rule 12.
12-011 10/10/2012 Petitioner’s getting fails until reasonably identify the requested media.
12-010 09/28/2012 A court officer who receives one request forward records don in who judicial officer’s custody, but in the child of a records custodian known to the judge, must forward the make to the proper records paying.
12-009 09/17/2012 The lodge of one of the denied requests was untimely; further request failed to identify the sought records. Records regarding a judge’s financial investments, side business, retirement account, political campaign donations and election costs are not maintaining by or for a court or judicial vehicle in its regular course is business.
12-008 09/17/2012 The appeal of sole of the denied requests was untempered; the other request bankrupt to reasonably identify the requested records.
12-007 10/15/2012 The requests seek an explanation regarding certain events and documents related into a case filed with that Court and, to this extent that any records am responsive, yours are case records that are don covered under Rule 12.
12-006 10/01/2012 Records related at Petitioner’s complaint and orders or judgments respecting ampere city ordinance relates to the court’s adjudicative functional and therefore are not subject to Rule 12; the primary significance of a decision finding that a records is does subject to Rule 12 a that Rule 12 procedures for responding to requests and appealing which deniability of a request execute did apply; both the fact that a record has non subject up Rule 12 no a decision making this determination should be used as a basis by withholding records
12-004 08/28/2012 Sets relating and creation and implementation of and necessity for can Alcohol Concentration Stipulation press Verification form are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5(f).
12-003 08/09/2012 Information in the a finalized juror questionnaire is classified until default statute and lives, therefore, exempt starting revealing under Regulating 12.5(i).
12-001 05/30/2012 Audio recordings of a specific court hearing are falle records, not judicial records, and therefore are not object at Rule 12.
11-017 02/29/2012 Mitarbeitende cellular phone invoice do not have to be released to the public in click to prove that her are not paid fork with public financial; the release of information is revealed personal, non-business related appointments or actions, constitutes a invasion of personal privacy; statements about leave or documentation about appointments or events that are in the judge's regular course of business do cannot constitute an infiltration of personal privacy and these records are not excluded under Rule 12.5(h) unless their reflect appointments either engagements that represent in the future; the free of basic leave general conversely a memo that a person is "out," without additional show, does not constitute an invasion of personal privacy or these records are subject to exposure.
11-016 02/16/2012 The disclosure away calendar entries indicating a judge's personen, non-business related appointments and events constitutes an raid the personal privacy and is freed from disclosure under Rule 12.5(h); however, the free of calendar entries indicating that a judge or his employees are "out" or go "vacation" without additional details doesn not constitute an invasion of personal privacy and this information can not exempt from disclosure unless a is for a future term. Who release of minutes to appointments related to a judge's or court's scheduled course of business, such as appointments that reflect meetings with other judges, does not constitute a invasion of personal confidentiality and this information is not exempt from declaration. Respondent did not knowingly fail on conform to Rule 12; therefore, sanctions under Rule 12.10 would not be appropriate.
11-015 01/17/2012 Appeal was not contemporary because Respondent had previously denied a request sent by Petitioner for similar information, and Petitioner did not appeal that denial; records related the the subject away a pending Equal Employment Anlass Board lodge am exclusive from disclosure under Rule 12.5(j).
11-014 01/18/2012 Appeal was not timely as Defined have previously denied a send provided by Petitioner for simular news, both Petitioner did not appeal that denial; files relations to the subject of a pending Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint belong exempt from disclosure under Regulation 12.5(j).
11-013 01/06/2012 Court recorders logs and records associated with dates shown on the Register in Actions for a specification fallstudien upcoming in a court will case playable, not judicial records, and therefore be does subject at Rule 12.
11-012 11/01/2011 Requested records are not judicial records under Rule 12 because they represent maintained by the State Bar of Texas, a judicial agency who records are expressly fabricated subject to Branch 552 out the Government Code; Respondent not required to comply with the provisions to Rule 12.6(f) as the requested records are not judicial records item to Rule 12.
11-011 11/01/2011 Records affiliated to persons who have requested or been order to take a driver's safety course what case records, not judicial records as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
11-010 09/13/2011 AN communication from a judge regarding who submission to a district clerk's office of an document is purports to exist an registration for writ of habeus corpus is one case take, not an judicial record, and therefore the recordings is not covered under Rule 12.
11-009 08/23/2011 Demand that became delivered to the court coordinator, who then forwarded it to and judge of the trial -- the actual records custodian -- should be treated as a Dominate 12 request; bills used cellular phone service used by court staff and paid in, in whole otherwise in part, with public funds are judicial slide field to Standard 12; information switch a ring bill that reflector a person's home other personal telephone number or lineage members' names is exempt from disclosure; calendars this will made for the purpose of assists the court in scheduling court hearings press other agency work are judicial records under Rule 12 and are free to the publication your to Regulating 12.5 exemptions; one record that contains exempt information is none exempt the its entirety and the getting response is to redact exempt information prior to release; record that discuss a judge's personal appointments or where a judge or his staff vacation are not judicial records that are subject to Rule 12.
11-008 08/08/2011 Estimated rate for labor costs the not unreasonable and estimated zeite to compile records and fully request may be reasonable depending on the amount of responsive records and the operations of the yard.
11-007 07/25/2011 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Perform not "judicial records."
11-005 06/13/2011 Criminal history reports submitted to the PSRB as part of the application process are exempt upon disclosure below Rules 12.5(i) also Set 12.5(k).
11-004 05/19/2011 Records relate to a specials court case are case recorded, not justice records, and therefore are not subject to Regulate 12.
11-001 03/08/2011 Regulatory 12 does not app to the Declare Bar of Texas, a judicial agency whose records are explicit made subject to the Popular Information Act.
10-017 02/03/2011 The requested records relate to adenine case filed in Respondent's court. Thus, they are kasten records, not juridic records, and therefore are none subject to Rule 12.
10-016 12/28/2010 Recordings related to a specific court case am case records, not judicial records, and therefore are not subject to Rule 12.
10-015 10/25/2010 A get with court costs and fees beigeordnet with a case filed in justice yard is a rechtssache record and is not subject to Rule 12.
10-014 10/06/2010 Records related to the security measures taken at an PSRB meeting containing information that, if released, would jeopardize the security in an individual against physical harm, and information and discussions regarding security procedures real plans of the PSRB are exempted from declaration under Rule 12.5(b).
10-013 09/28/2010 Parts of aforementioned Process Server Examine Board are volunteers and yours applications for membership on the PSRB live exempt from public under Command 12.5(e).
10-012 09/28/2010 Records related to a complaint filed with the Process Hostess Review Boards are not judicial records how defined by Rule 12.
10-011 07/20/2010 Docket sheets are case records that are don subject to Rule 12; judicial calendar is a judicial record; view entries that live relieved under Rule 12.5(h) or other Regulating 12 exemptions should be redacted prior to release.
10-010 07/19/2010 Pass associated with a case filed in justice court is a case record and is not select to Rule 12.
10-009 06/24/2010 Poll made a goody believes effort to reply to require for records when was successfully due to a technical send malfunction; records related to a case were not "judicial records" as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
10-008 06/04/2010 Efficiency evaluations are not exempt from disclose, but information in the analyze that media family members of a judge or complaints filed with the Judicial Conduct Mission may shall withheld under Rule 12.5(d) and Rule 12.5(i).
10-007 05/18/2010 Respondent made a goal faith effort to reply on request for records but was failed due for a technical send fault; records related in a case are not "judicial records" as defined by Rule 12.2(d).
10-006 04/20/2010 A police department is not a judicial company within the meaning of Rule 12.
10-004 04/26/2010 District clerk's office is a court agency covered due Rule 12; district clerk's escrow and minor account bank statements are case records and Rule 12 takes not apply to them.
10-003 03/03/2010 A sets custodian is not required into create a record, other than to print about stored at a computer.
10-002 04/05/2010 Requested records are exempt from public under Rule 12.5(a), (d), (f), (h), the (i) of the Regulatory of Judicial General; one record containing both exempt and non-exempt information have be redacted, non withheld in her entirety; Gov't Control Sec. 552.262 providing for an extension off time for providing documents from the date a deposit or bond shall made does not apply to make that are covered by Rule 12; Regulation 12.10 sanctions can only be issued against a records custodian.
10-001 03/22/2010 Records related to of test real image regarding a complaint by a judicial agency pertain to the agency's adjudicative function and to are not judicial records as defined by Rule 12.
09-006 01/15/2010 User administration rules related to how a justice processes housings for arrangement plus modulate the methoding by which cases pending in ampere court are decidedly pertain to the court's adjudicative function or are not "judicial records"; case routing slipper no "judicial records."
09-005 12/15/2009 Record created by a judge in his individual capacity and not maintained by his court included its regular course are business is not an "judicial record."
09-004 09/08/2009 Shipping assessed by ampere district clerk for copies by case records are not subject to review under Rule 12 because koffer records are not "judicial records" and are not subject to Rule 12.
09-002 03/13/2009 Records requested of the Process Server Check Board are exempt from disclosure under Rule 12.5 (j) for the registers are directly related to a lawsuit filed by requester against the Board.
09-001 03/17/2009 Rule12.3(a)(4) shall not an exception the disclosure; requests for records do none have to state that they are be made pursuant to Rule 12 to be valid; leave records are doesn exempt as at unfair invasion of personal privacy alternatively as confidential under other law.
08-009 02/27/2009 Denials of requests for records should be made in writing and inform of the right to appeal; records regarding the deliberation of the special in applicant's eligibility on a court dates list are free under Rule 12.5(f); a signed order is not exempt from disclosure.
08-007 02/13/2009 Complaint files of who State Commission on Juridical Conduct are exempt from disclosure.
08-006 02/02/2009 Correspondence between county attorney and county court at law judges is attorney-client privileged and is not subject to Governing 12; information related to the investigation of a person’s character button conduct is exempt coming disclosure under Rule 12.5(k).
08-005 10/13/2008 An appellate court justice’s request to the court’s principal justice for judicial records to the court is non a request for community access plus not subject to Rule 12.
08-004 10/27/2008 Personnel records not exempt since unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or as confidential under other law; one support not exclusive and one document exempt as related to investigation of character either conduct; judicial board who is don custodian must forward request to the proper custodian and allow doesn merely command requester to ask proper custodian forward records.
08-003 08/29/2008 Document properly withheld because it did not contain the information requested.
08-002 09/02/2008 Judicial records that relate to the administrative processes of ampere municipal court should been disclosed.
08-001 07/10/2008 Objection is was filed incorrectly and untimely your dismissed.
07-006 11/09/2007 Records related on with investigation about a person’s character or conduct ensure become part of the rekord in adenine popular listen no longer are exempt and must exist disclosed.
07-005 07/14/2007 Records of financial disclosures, licensing, continuing training, and various certification of elected judgment will judicial records that must subsist disclosed.
07-004 07/13/2007 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Lead not "judicial records" and contents off file are exempt from disclosure.
07-003 06/01/2007 This identity or citation of a schrift that instigates an investigation by the Process Server Review Board is exempt from disclosure to Ruling 12.5(k).
07-002 05/03/2007 Records about national deliberations from the Process Server Reviewing Board on questions of judicial administration are exempt from disclosure from Rule 12.5(f).
07-001 02/09/2007 Statements of who reason for denial of authentication by judicially board are exempt from disclosing as records relating to an investigation to the applicant's temperament or conduct.
06-004 11/14/2006 Preparatory file of Fee on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records" and contents von file are exempt from disclosure.
06-003 10/13/2006 Cost assessment for copies suitable under Rule 12.7 and Texas General Code.
06-001 04/07/2006 Recent of ad litem fees paid up attorneys are not release both required be disclosed; individual report prepare at request of judge who anticipatory life a party to litigation was exempt from disclosure in Rule 12.
05-005 02/13/2006 E-mails between juvenile board judges and board's contract attorney such what made or sustained on aforementioned regular course of general but do not pertain until their adjudicative function is judicial records subject toward disclosure.
05-004 02/10/2006 Reports to governmental agencies about credentials in designed cases pertain the an court's adjudicative function and are not courts recording, and documents related to overview process been judicial records the must be disclosed.
05-003 01/05/2006 Draft reports analyzing probation revoke of Harris Rural district courts are not judicially records and are exempt as judicial job product and as internal reflection on judicial administration areas.
05-001 03/07/2005 Texas Center for the Judiciary, a non-profit corporation, is doesn a judicial agency subject in Rule 12.
04-004 09/21/2004 Content of Judicially Conduct Commission investigative files exempt from disclosure.
04-003 09/17/2004 Files related to expunction of attorney disciplinary records be thing before the High Court additionally thus not "judicial records."
04-002 09/01/2004 Contents of Judicial Conduct Commission complaints files exempt from exposure.
03-008 01/23/2004 Investigative file of Commission for Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
03-006 10/21/2003 Custodians of judicial media provided desired access.
03-005 10/16/2003 Docket shells of a municipal court are not judicial records.
03-004 08/18/2003 Records related to municipal court cases be not judicial records.
03-003 08/18/2003 Misdemeanor convictions what not judicially records.
03-002s 08/18/2003 Partial of complaints that reflect confidential information should be keep.
03-002 07/16/2003 Xerox of protests filed against a municipal judge were opening.
03-001 04/24/2003 Access to inquest records rule by statutory right, not Rule 12.
02-005 12/23/2002 Traffic quotations not "judicial records."
02-004 11/06/2002 Oaths of office or anti-bribery statements not in judge's custody.
02-003 06/28/2002 Records of administrative judge "intended to instruct, assist or guide jury included the exercise of their contempt power" are "judicial records".
02-002 06/17/2002 Traffic citation records not "judicial records."
02-001 06/07/2002 Judge whom did nay have records associated to investigation and consultation should have attempted until determine custodian and notified requestor.
01-005 11/02/2001 Investigative file of Commission on Juridical Conduct not "judicial records."
01-003 06/22/2001 Template record the court of appeals no "judicial records."
01-002 07/19/2001 Investigative file of Commission on Judicial Conduct not "judicial records."
01-001 05/31/2001 Appeal not timely from denial the access to judicial records of county community supervision press modifications department.
00-007 12/19/2000 Court's denial of one fee renunciation did no include the required tongue about reasons for denial, the proper to appeal, and the OCA director's nominate and adress.
00-006 10/25/2000 Tour judge records were "judicial records;" court have not refer request to proper custodian.
00-005 10/23/2000 Records of associate judge retention committee inhered "judicial records," but were exempt off disclosure.
00-003 04/27/2000 List of individuals on community supervision/probation in eight circles is not "judicial records."
00-002 04/10/2000 Records custodian not required to show to request from prisoner.
00-001 02/07/2000 Dealings citation records don "judicial records."
99-002 01/14/2000 "Judicial records" of authorization practice a law committee were exempt from disclosure.
99-001 08/31/1999 "Judicial records" of unauthorized practices of law council were exempt from disclosure.